Pub Date : 2024-05-13DOI: 10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010141
Hans Bekaert, Mieke De Cock, Wim Van Dooren, Hans Van Winckel
We present two studies to investigate the extent to which attending a planetarium presentation increases secondary school students’ understanding of the apparent motion of the Sun and stars. In the first study, we used the Apparent Motion of Sun and Stars (AMoSS) test in a pretest/post-test/retention test setting to measure learning gains and improved insight of 404 students (16- to 17-year-olds) after attending a classical planetarium presentation at the Brussels Planetarium. The AMoSS test is a questionnaire on the daily and yearly apparent motion and the observer’s position. It consists of six multiple-choice questions about the Sun and six similar multiple-choice questions about the stars. We asked the students to explain their choices. The learning gains are rather small and the scores improve more on the Sun questions than on the star questions. This difference is largest for questions about the yearly apparent motion. We found that this is due to the fact that many students copy their knowledge about the Sun to the stars. Based on the results of this survey, we developed a new planetarium presentation with particular attention to the use of the celestial sphere model. We also developed a learning module that prepares students at school for this planetarium presentation. In a second study, we measured the learning gains after attending this new planetarium presentation among 339 students, also 16- to 17-year-olds. Some school groups had worked through the preparatory learning module at school and others had not. We find that the learning gains on the star questions are significantly higher than in the first study, due to better scores on the yearly apparent motion questions. In this regard, it is notable that we do not see significant differences between those students who prepared the presentation at school and those who did not. In the second study, the number of students who answer all questions correctly after attending the planetarium presentation or working through the learning module increases, but only significantly for those students who worked through the learning module at school.
{"title":"Investigating students’ insight after attending a planetarium presentation about the apparent motion of the Sun and stars","authors":"Hans Bekaert, Mieke De Cock, Wim Van Dooren, Hans Van Winckel","doi":"10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010141","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010141","url":null,"abstract":"We present two studies to investigate the extent to which attending a planetarium presentation increases secondary school students’ understanding of the apparent motion of the Sun and stars. In the first study, we used the Apparent Motion of Sun and Stars (AMoSS) test in a pretest/post-test/retention test setting to measure learning gains and improved insight of 404 students (16- to 17-year-olds) after attending a classical planetarium presentation at the Brussels Planetarium. The AMoSS test is a questionnaire on the daily and yearly apparent motion and the observer’s position. It consists of six multiple-choice questions about the Sun and six similar multiple-choice questions about the stars. We asked the students to explain their choices. The learning gains are rather small and the scores improve more on the Sun questions than on the star questions. This difference is largest for questions about the yearly apparent motion. We found that this is due to the fact that many students copy their knowledge about the Sun to the stars. Based on the results of this survey, we developed a new planetarium presentation with particular attention to the use of the celestial sphere model. We also developed a learning module that prepares students at school for this planetarium presentation. In a second study, we measured the learning gains after attending this new planetarium presentation among 339 students, also 16- to 17-year-olds. Some school groups had worked through the preparatory learning module at school and others had not. We find that the learning gains on the star questions are significantly higher than in the first study, due to better scores on the yearly apparent motion questions. In this regard, it is notable that we do not see significant differences between those students who prepared the presentation at school and those who did not. In the second study, the number of students who answer all questions correctly after attending the planetarium presentation or working through the learning module increases, but only significantly for those students who worked through the learning module at school.","PeriodicalId":54296,"journal":{"name":"Physical Review Physics Education Research","volume":"210 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2024-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140939962","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-05-10DOI: 10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010140
Moire K. M. Prescott, Laura Madson, Sandra M. Way, Kelly N. Sanderson
While many previous studies have indicated that encouraging a growth mindset can improve student learning outcomes, this conclusion’s applicability to college-level astronomy classrooms remains poorly understood owing to the variation in students’ overall and domain-specific learning attitudes. To address this, we surveyed undergraduate students in an introductory astronomy class about their attitudes towards learning astronomy over the course of five semesters. Overall, students felt an affinity for astronomy, felt moderately competent, perceived astronomy to be intermediate in terms of difficulty, and agreed strongly with standard statements reflecting a “growth mindset,” i.e., the belief that intelligence is malleable rather than fixed from birth. Their responses were stable over the course of the semester and did not appear to depend strongly on student demographics. The unexpected start of the COVID-19 pandemic and the associated shift to all-virtual learning correlated with a drop in their affinity for astronomy, a small decrease in their perceived competence, and an increase in the perceived difficulty of the topic. Their overall learning mindset showed negligible change during this time, emphasizing the stability of their belief in a growth mindset as compared to other measured learning attitudes. However, more nuanced questions about their behaviors and interpretations in the classroom, about how they felt “in the moment,” and about what factors were most important for their success in the class revealed significantly lower alignment with a growth mindset. This suggests that while introductory astronomy students may believe that they have a growth mindset, this mindset is not necessarily reflected in their self-reported classroom behaviors or measured responses to actual learning challenges.
{"title":"Prevalence of a growth mindset among introductory astronomy students","authors":"Moire K. M. Prescott, Laura Madson, Sandra M. Way, Kelly N. Sanderson","doi":"10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010140","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010140","url":null,"abstract":"While many previous studies have indicated that encouraging a growth mindset can improve student learning outcomes, this conclusion’s applicability to college-level astronomy classrooms remains poorly understood owing to the variation in students’ overall and domain-specific learning attitudes. To address this, we surveyed undergraduate students in an introductory astronomy class about their attitudes towards learning astronomy over the course of five semesters. Overall, students felt an affinity for astronomy, felt moderately competent, perceived astronomy to be intermediate in terms of difficulty, and agreed strongly with standard statements reflecting a “growth mindset,” i.e., the belief that intelligence is malleable rather than fixed from birth. Their responses were stable over the course of the semester and did not appear to depend strongly on student demographics. The unexpected start of the COVID-19 pandemic and the associated shift to all-virtual learning correlated with a drop in their affinity for astronomy, a small decrease in their perceived competence, and an increase in the perceived difficulty of the topic. Their overall learning mindset showed negligible change during this time, emphasizing the stability of their belief in a growth mindset as compared to other measured learning attitudes. However, more nuanced questions about their behaviors and interpretations in the classroom, about how they felt “in the moment,” and about what factors were most important for their success in the class revealed significantly lower alignment with a growth mindset. This suggests that while introductory astronomy students may believe that they have a growth mindset, this mindset is not necessarily reflected in their self-reported classroom behaviors or measured responses to actual learning challenges.","PeriodicalId":54296,"journal":{"name":"Physical Review Physics Education Research","volume":"47 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2024-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140942561","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-05-10DOI: 10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010139
Shiva Basir, Eric Burkholder
Doctoral qualifying exams are considered essential in assessing a student’s readiness for research and advanced studies. Despite their significant role in many physics programs, questions have been raised about their format, execution, and relevance. Our research investigates perceptions held by faculty members regarding the graduate doctoral examination (GDE), a written qualifying exam in Auburn University’s physics department doctoral program. We used a combination of semistructured interviews and a survey to probe their viewpoints about the purpose and necessity of written qualifying exams, their role in student preparation for these exams, and the efficacy of these exams in measuring students’ comprehensive knowledge and potential for success in physics. Despite the general consensus on the necessity of the GDE, faculty members expressed doubts about its ability to accurately predict students’ future research success and its alignment with other graduate program elements such as coursework. Proposed modifications ranged from an emphasis on oral assessments and research presentations to a complete overhaul of the examination structure. Despite these suggestions for change, the lack of agreement on a specific alternative underscores the complexity of executing substantial modifications to the GDE. Our study contributes to the ongoing dialogue on optimizing doctoral qualifying exams to better serve students and academic institutions.
博士资格考试被认为是评估学生是否为研究和深造做好准备的必要条件。尽管博士资格考试在许多物理课程中扮演着重要角色，但人们对其形式、执行和相关性提出了质疑。我们的研究调查了奥本大学物理系博士生项目中的笔试资格考试--研究生博士生考试（GDE）--的教师看法。我们采用了半结构式访谈和问卷调查相结合的方法，探究他们对资格笔试的目的和必要性、他们在学生备考中的作用，以及这些考试在衡量学生的综合知识和在物理学领域取得成功的潜力方面的有效性的看法。尽管大家对 GDE 的必要性达成了普遍共识，但教职员工们对它能否准确预测学生未来的研究成就以及它与其他研究生项目要素（如课程）的协调性表示怀疑。提出的修改建议从强调口头评估和研究报告到彻底改革考试结构不等。尽管有这些修改建议，但在具体的替代方案上却没有达成一致，这凸显了对 GDE 进行重大修改的复杂性。我们的研究为正在进行的关于优化博士资格考试以更好地服务于学生和学术机构的对话做出了贡献。
{"title":"Investigating faculty perspectives on written qualifying exams in physics","authors":"Shiva Basir, Eric Burkholder","doi":"10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010139","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010139","url":null,"abstract":"Doctoral qualifying exams are considered essential in assessing a student’s readiness for research and advanced studies. Despite their significant role in many physics programs, questions have been raised about their format, execution, and relevance. Our research investigates perceptions held by faculty members regarding the graduate doctoral examination (GDE), a written qualifying exam in Auburn University’s physics department doctoral program. We used a combination of semistructured interviews and a survey to probe their viewpoints about the purpose and necessity of written qualifying exams, their role in student preparation for these exams, and the efficacy of these exams in measuring students’ comprehensive knowledge and potential for success in physics. Despite the general consensus on the necessity of the GDE, faculty members expressed doubts about its ability to accurately predict students’ future research success and its alignment with other graduate program elements such as coursework. Proposed modifications ranged from an emphasis on oral assessments and research presentations to a complete overhaul of the examination structure. Despite these suggestions for change, the lack of agreement on a specific alternative underscores the complexity of executing substantial modifications to the GDE. Our study contributes to the ongoing dialogue on optimizing doctoral qualifying exams to better serve students and academic institutions.","PeriodicalId":54296,"journal":{"name":"Physical Review Physics Education Research","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2024-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140939960","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-05-08DOI: 10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010138
Jessica L. Rosenberg, Nancy Holincheck, Michele Colandene
Efforts to build the workforce in support of the second quantum revolution are growing, including the creation of education programs that will prepare students for jobs in this area. We surveyed 186 undergraduate students with majors across the science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) disciplines and followed up with group interviews to understand their perspectives. The project was designed to understand what these STEM students know about quantum and quantum career opportunities and their level of interest in pursuing a career related to quantum. We found that most of the students know very little about quantum. Nevertheless, except for students in the life sciences, there was an interest in quantum careers. Across STEM majors, women were less likely to express interest in quantum careers than men, but this difference disappeared when we examined only physical and computer science majors. Of the few students who had knowledge of quantum concepts, most learned about this topic from online media, especially online videos. Some students reported learning about quantum in high school classes, where it was taught as an extension beyond the usual topics of the course. The undergraduate STEM students in our study identified multiple ways they would like to learn more about quantum, including short videos, seminars, courses, certificates, and degree programs.
{"title":"Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics undergraduates’ knowledge and interest in quantum careers: Barriers and opportunities to building a diverse quantum workforce","authors":"Jessica L. Rosenberg, Nancy Holincheck, Michele Colandene","doi":"10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010138","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010138","url":null,"abstract":"Efforts to build the workforce in support of the second quantum revolution are growing, including the creation of education programs that will prepare students for jobs in this area. We surveyed 186 undergraduate students with majors across the science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) disciplines and followed up with group interviews to understand their perspectives. The project was designed to understand what these STEM students know about quantum and quantum career opportunities and their level of interest in pursuing a career related to quantum. We found that most of the students know very little about quantum. Nevertheless, except for students in the life sciences, there was an interest in quantum careers. Across STEM majors, women were less likely to express interest in quantum careers than men, but this difference disappeared when we examined only physical and computer science majors. Of the few students who had knowledge of quantum concepts, most learned about this topic from online media, especially online videos. Some students reported learning about quantum in high school classes, where it was taught as an extension beyond the usual topics of the course. The undergraduate STEM students in our study identified multiple ways they would like to learn more about quantum, including short videos, seminars, courses, certificates, and degree programs.","PeriodicalId":54296,"journal":{"name":"Physical Review Physics Education Research","volume":"62 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2024-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140940026","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-05-08DOI: 10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010137
Rachel Freed, David McKinnon, Saeed Salimpour, Michael Fitzgerald, Dan Reichart, Christina Norris
In this paper, we present the results of an investigation into the effects of engaging with robotic telescopes during an Astronomy 101 (Astro101) course in the United States and Canada on the self-efficacy of students. Using an astronomy self-efficacy survey that measures both astronomy personal self-efficacy and instrumental self-efficacy, the authors probed their covariance with the respondents’ experience of an Astro101 course that uses robotic telescopes to collect astronomical data. Strong effects on both self-efficacy scales were seen over the period of a semester utilizing a scalable educational design using robotic telescopes. After participation in the course, the results show that the gender gap in self-efficacy between self-identified men and women is largely reduced to statistically insignificant differences compared to the initial large significant difference.
{"title":"Self-efficacy changes and gender effects on self-efficacy in a large-scale robotic telescope focused curriculum","authors":"Rachel Freed, David McKinnon, Saeed Salimpour, Michael Fitzgerald, Dan Reichart, Christina Norris","doi":"10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010137","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010137","url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, we present the results of an investigation into the effects of engaging with robotic telescopes during an Astronomy 101 (Astro101) course in the United States and Canada on the self-efficacy of students. Using an astronomy self-efficacy survey that measures both astronomy personal self-efficacy and instrumental self-efficacy, the authors probed their covariance with the respondents’ experience of an Astro101 course that uses robotic telescopes to collect astronomical data. Strong effects on both self-efficacy scales were seen over the period of a semester utilizing a scalable educational design using robotic telescopes. After participation in the course, the results show that the gender gap in self-efficacy between self-identified men and women is largely reduced to statistically insignificant differences compared to the initial large significant difference.","PeriodicalId":54296,"journal":{"name":"Physical Review Physics Education Research","volume":"191 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2024-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140940030","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-05-07DOI: 10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010136
Mike Verostek, Casey W. Miller, Benjamin M. Zwickl
Joining a research group is one of the most important events on a graduate student’s path to becoming an independent physics researcher and earning a Ph.D. However, graduate students’ perspectives on the experience of finding a research group are not well documented in the literature. Understanding these perspectives is crucial for evaluating whether departments are providing students with adequate support while they search for a research group, and how difficulties during this process contribute to attrition. Semistructured interviews with first and second year physics Ph.D. students reveal that incoming graduate students see joining a research group as a significant decision, and recognize that it may impact whether they will be able to complete the program. We found that students who struggled to find a group felt isolated and worried about falling behind their peers, whereas students who were able to immerse themselves in a positive group environment reported increased sense of belonging in their programs. The process of finding a research group often held differential importance for students identifying as women and nonbinary, who at times reported having to deprioritize their preferred research topic in order to be part of a more inclusive working environment. Although incoming graduate students characterized joining a research group as a significant decision, they often felt unprepared to make it. Moreover, they perceived an overall lack of guidance and structure from their departments, and characterized coursework as a barrier to searching for a group. Our findings suggest that providing students with better support during their group search process could help improve retention, particularly for traditionally underrepresented students, and improve students’ overall satisfaction in their graduate programs.
{"title":"Physics Ph.D. student perspectives on the importance and difficulty of finding a research group","authors":"Mike Verostek, Casey W. Miller, Benjamin M. Zwickl","doi":"10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010136","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010136","url":null,"abstract":"Joining a research group is one of the most important events on a graduate student’s path to becoming an independent physics researcher and earning a Ph.D. However, graduate students’ perspectives on the experience of finding a research group are not well documented in the literature. Understanding these perspectives is crucial for evaluating whether departments are providing students with adequate support while they search for a research group, and how difficulties during this process contribute to attrition. Semistructured interviews with <math display=\"inline\" xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML\"><mi>N</mi><mo>=</mo><mn>20</mn></math> first and second year physics Ph.D. students reveal that incoming graduate students see joining a research group as a significant decision, and recognize that it may impact whether they will be able to complete the program. We found that students who struggled to find a group felt isolated and worried about falling behind their peers, whereas students who were able to immerse themselves in a positive group environment reported increased sense of belonging in their programs. The process of finding a research group often held differential importance for students identifying as women and nonbinary, who at times reported having to deprioritize their preferred research topic in order to be part of a more inclusive working environment. Although incoming graduate students characterized joining a research group as a significant decision, they often felt unprepared to make it. Moreover, they perceived an overall lack of guidance and structure from their departments, and characterized coursework as a barrier to searching for a group. Our findings suggest that providing students with better support during their group search process could help improve retention, particularly for traditionally underrepresented students, and improve students’ overall satisfaction in their graduate programs.","PeriodicalId":54296,"journal":{"name":"Physical Review Physics Education Research","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2024-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140881782","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-05-06DOI: 10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010135
Saeed Salimpour, Michael Fitzgerald, Robert Hollow
Over the years, there have been various calls to increase and better represent astronomy in curricula. This is motivated by views within the astronomy and astronomy education communities that the awe, wonder, and interdisciplinary nature of astronomy has the potential to engage students in STEM across disciplines. Reviews of curricula have shown that astronomy topics are represented in most mandated curricula around the world and although there is a homogeneity of astronomy topics in most mandated curricula, this representation has its limitations. By using the Australian National Curriculum, the USA-based Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), and the Swedish National Curriculum as examples, this study unpacks ideas around “How much astronomy is enough?”, the mismatches between astronomy topics in curricula and what constitutes astronomical literacy within the context of the Big Ideas in Astronomy document. The results identify that there is a significant gap at the galactic and extragalactic scales when considering the typical progression of astronomy topics when considering the conceptual, spatial, and temporal scales of the topics. Specifically, topics in curricula jump from tangible concepts within the student’s immediate and Solar System spatial scales in primary school to cosmological spatial scales in upper high school, without reference to spatial and conceptual connecting topics at galactic scales. Potential sample curriculum statements drawn from the Big Ideas are presented as a suggested curriculum inclusion. This curricula gap is identified as a potential source of a similar gap in education research in these topics at these levels, which in turn perpetuates the problem by there being a lack of research-based evidence for inclusion in the curriculum.
{"title":"Examining the mismatch between the intended astronomy curriculum content, astronomical literacy, and the astronomical universe","authors":"Saeed Salimpour, Michael Fitzgerald, Robert Hollow","doi":"10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010135","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010135","url":null,"abstract":"Over the years, there have been various calls to increase and better represent astronomy in curricula. This is motivated by views within the astronomy and astronomy education communities that the awe, wonder, and interdisciplinary nature of astronomy has the potential to engage students in STEM across disciplines. Reviews of curricula have shown that astronomy topics are represented in most mandated curricula around the world and although there is a homogeneity of astronomy topics in most mandated curricula, this representation has its limitations. By using the Australian National Curriculum, the USA-based Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), and the Swedish National Curriculum as examples, this study unpacks ideas around “How much astronomy is enough?”, the mismatches between astronomy topics in curricula and what constitutes astronomical literacy within the context of the Big Ideas in Astronomy document. The results identify that there is a significant gap at the galactic and extragalactic scales when considering the typical progression of astronomy topics when considering the conceptual, spatial, and temporal scales of the topics. Specifically, topics in curricula jump from tangible concepts within the student’s immediate and Solar System spatial scales in primary school to cosmological spatial scales in upper high school, without reference to spatial and conceptual connecting topics at galactic scales. Potential sample curriculum statements drawn from the Big Ideas are presented as a suggested curriculum inclusion. This curricula gap is identified as a potential source of a similar gap in education research in these topics at these levels, which in turn perpetuates the problem by there being a lack of research-based evidence for inclusion in the curriculum.","PeriodicalId":54296,"journal":{"name":"Physical Review Physics Education Research","volume":"99 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2024-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140881862","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-05-03DOI: 10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010134
Vegard Gjerde, Sivert Hagane
Peer Instruction gives practice in the abstract language of physics, addresses common misconceptions among students, and is more effective than traditional lecturing. However, it is not clear what makes Peer Instruction effective nor how we might improve the method. An emerging perspective is that what makes Peer Instruction effective is how it stimulates certain cognitive processes. Research also indicates that providing rules for discussion may improve the effect of peer instruction. Hence, we wanted to answer two research questions in this study: (i) What cognitive learning processes occur during peer discussions? (ii) How do students follow discussion rules? To answer our research questions, we recorded and thematically analyzed peer discussions during Peer Instruction in an introductory physics course. The most prevalent cognitive process during peer discussions was decoding the problem. The most prevalent type of explanation was explanations with physics concepts, which usually led the students to an incorrect answer. The next most prevalent type of explanation was explanation with physics models, which usually led the students to the correct answer. The students also explained with reference to their experience or examples—intuitive or analogical explanations—and it usually added little to the conversation, was wrong, or created confusion. Some discussion rules had limited impact, prompting suggestions for rule improvements to optimize Peer Instruction. Our work contributes to the literature on Peer Instruction with a cognitively based description of the learning processes and how we might further improve and ensure the effectiveness of Peer Instruction.
{"title":"Enhancing peer instruction in physics: Understanding cognitive processes and refining rules","authors":"Vegard Gjerde, Sivert Hagane","doi":"10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010134","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010134","url":null,"abstract":"Peer Instruction gives practice in the abstract language of physics, addresses common misconceptions among students, and is more effective than traditional lecturing. However, it is not clear what makes Peer Instruction effective nor how we might improve the method. An emerging perspective is that what makes Peer Instruction effective is how it stimulates certain cognitive processes. Research also indicates that providing rules for discussion may improve the effect of peer instruction. Hence, we wanted to answer two research questions in this study: (i) What cognitive learning processes occur during peer discussions? (ii) How do students follow discussion rules? To answer our research questions, we recorded and thematically analyzed peer discussions during Peer Instruction in an introductory physics course. The most prevalent cognitive process during peer discussions was decoding the problem. The most prevalent type of explanation was explanations with physics concepts, which usually led the students to an incorrect answer. The next most prevalent type of explanation was explanation with physics models, which usually led the students to the correct answer. The students also explained with reference to their experience or examples—intuitive or analogical explanations—and it usually added little to the conversation, was wrong, or created confusion. Some discussion rules had limited impact, prompting suggestions for rule improvements to optimize Peer Instruction. Our work contributes to the literature on Peer Instruction with a cognitively based description of the learning processes and how we might further improve and ensure the effectiveness of Peer Instruction.","PeriodicalId":54296,"journal":{"name":"Physical Review Physics Education Research","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2024-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140839595","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-05-03DOI: 10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010132
Diana Sachmpazidi, Chandra Turpen, Jayna Petrella, Robert P. Dalka, Fatima N. Abdurrahman
Leaders, policymakers, and researchers have called attention to the need to improve critical aspects of physics programs, from teaching and pedagogy to making physics more diverse and equitable. As such programmatic changes are challenging and require a second-order change to be effective, many physics faculty responsible for carrying them out are not equipped with the necessary experience and support to do so. This can result in a significant waste of resources and time. Moreover, while there is a robust body of literature in higher education focusing on institutional and cultural change, there is a limited understanding of the baseline of the culture of physics programs (where physics programs are starting from), a critical aspect that shapes the change effort. Dr. David Craig and Dr. Joel Corbo with the support of the American Physical Society and the American Association of Physics Teachers developed the Departmental Action Leadership Institutes (DALIs) to meet the needs of the physics community by supporting physics faculty to effectively design and implement departmental change focusing on areas needing improvement. In this research project, we developed case studies of five DALI-active physics programs from two DALI cohorts. We use a cultural dynamics lens to document facets of the dominant culture around how physics faculty approach and pursue change work. We see evidence of DALI participants’ growing awareness of taken-for-granted assumptions about educational change processes and assessment practices within their departmental cultures and coming to recognize and value alternative ways of collaborating and enacting change in their local contexts. We found that physics faculty typically approach change work in a rushed and ad hoc way ignoring the use of formal evidence. In particular, we found that any data collection efforts are the primary responsibility of a single person, rarely becoming the focus of joint attention. Whenever data did receive joint attention, it was approached in a cursory way without meaningfully informing collective change efforts. This study lays the foundation to explore critical aspects of the dominant physics culture that may constrain enacting particular forms of programmatic change. In future work, we document the cultural shifts made by these DALI-active departments around change work.
领导者、政策制定者和研究人员都呼吁关注改进物理课程关键方面的必要性，从教学和教学法到使物理更加多样化和公平。由于此类课程改革具有挑战性，需要进行二阶改革才能取得成效，因此许多负责实施这些改革的物理系教师并不具备必要的经验和支持。这会造成资源和时间的严重浪费。此外，虽然高等教育领域有大量关注机构和文化变革的文献，但对物理课程文化基线（物理课程的起点）的了解却很有限，而这正是影响变革努力的一个关键方面。大卫-克雷格博士和乔尔-科博博士在美国物理学会和美国物理教师协会的支持下，建立了 "系部行动领导力研究所"（DALIs），以满足物理学界的需求，支持物理系教师有效地设计和实施系部变革，重点关注需要改进的领域。在本研究项目中，我们对两届 DALI 的五个 DALI 活跃物理项目进行了案例研究。我们使用文化动力学视角，记录了围绕物理系教师如何对待和追求变革工作的主流文化的方方面面。我们发现有证据表明，DALI 的参与者越来越意识到在他们的部门文化中，关于教育变革过程和评估实践的假设是理所当然的，他们开始认识到并重视在当地环境中合作和实施变革的其他方式。我们发现，物理系教师通常以匆忙和临时的方式开展变革工作，忽视了正式证据的使用。特别是，我们发现任何数据收集工作都是一个人的主要责任，很少成为共同关注的焦点。即使数据得到了共同关注，也是草草了事，没有为集体变革努力提供有意义的信息。本研究为探索主流物理文化的关键方面奠定了基础，这些方面可能会制约特定形式的计划变革。在未来的工作中，我们将记录这些活跃于 DALI 的部门围绕变革工作所进行的文化转变。
{"title":"Recognizing dominant cultures around assessment and educational change in physics programs","authors":"Diana Sachmpazidi, Chandra Turpen, Jayna Petrella, Robert P. Dalka, Fatima N. Abdurrahman","doi":"10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010132","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010132","url":null,"abstract":"Leaders, policymakers, and researchers have called attention to the need to improve critical aspects of physics programs, from teaching and pedagogy to making physics more diverse and equitable. As such programmatic changes are challenging and require a second-order change to be effective, many physics faculty responsible for carrying them out are not equipped with the necessary experience and support to do so. This can result in a significant waste of resources and time. Moreover, while there is a robust body of literature in higher education focusing on institutional and cultural change, there is a limited understanding of the baseline of the culture of physics programs (where physics programs are starting from), a critical aspect that shapes the change effort. Dr. David Craig and Dr. Joel Corbo with the support of the American Physical Society and the American Association of Physics Teachers developed the Departmental Action Leadership Institutes (DALIs) to meet the needs of the physics community by supporting physics faculty to effectively design and implement departmental change focusing on areas needing improvement. In this research project, we developed case studies of five DALI-active physics programs from two DALI cohorts. We use a cultural dynamics lens to document facets of the dominant culture around how physics faculty approach and pursue change work. We see evidence of DALI participants’ growing awareness of taken-for-granted assumptions about educational change processes and assessment practices within their departmental cultures and coming to recognize and value alternative ways of collaborating and enacting change in their local contexts. We found that physics faculty typically approach change work in a rushed and <i>ad hoc</i> way ignoring the use of formal evidence. In particular, we found that any data collection efforts are the primary responsibility of a single person, rarely becoming the focus of joint attention. Whenever data did receive joint attention, it was approached in a cursory way without meaningfully informing collective change efforts. This study lays the foundation to explore critical aspects of the dominant physics culture that may constrain enacting particular forms of programmatic change. In future work, we document the cultural shifts made by these DALI-active departments around change work.","PeriodicalId":54296,"journal":{"name":"Physical Review Physics Education Research","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2024-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140839591","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-05-03DOI: 10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010133
Meagan Sundstrom, Logan Kageorge
Students’ beliefs about the extent to which meaningful others, including their peers, recognize them as a strong science student are correlated with their persistence in science courses and careers. Yet, prior work has found a gender bias in peer recognition, in which student nominations of strong peers disproportionately favor men over women, in some instructional science contexts. Researchers have hypothesized that such a gender bias diminishes over time, as determined by students’ academic year: studies have found a gender bias in peer recognition in science courses aimed at first-year students, but not in science courses aimed at beyond first-year students. This hypothesis that patterns of peer recognition change over time, however, has yet to be tested with longitudinal data—previous studies only examine snapshots of different students in different science courses. In this study, we isolate the effect of time on peer recognition by analyzing student nominations of strong peers across a two-semester introductory physics course sequence, containing the same set of students and the same instructor in both semesters, at a mostly women institution. Using a combination of social network analysis and qualitative methods, we find that while many students receive similar levels of peer recognition over time, the four most highly nominated students—the recognition celebrities—exhibit some change between semesters even in this highly controlled setting. Furthermore, we observe that these changes in the celebrities track closely with changes in student outspokenness and that being outspoken is likely more important for gaining recognition than earning a high grade in the class. These findings lend support to prior work’s hypothesis that peer recognition changes over time, but also challenge the generalizability of previous results (i.e., that patterns of recognition are related to students’ academic year). Instead, peer recognition seems highly sensitive to variables such as individual students’ participation and, therefore, may be course specific. We provide recommendations for both when and how instructors may intervene on peer recognition based on our results.
{"title":"Investigating peer recognition across an introductory physics sequence: Do first impressions last?","authors":"Meagan Sundstrom, Logan Kageorge","doi":"10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010133","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevphyseducres.20.010133","url":null,"abstract":"Students’ beliefs about the extent to which meaningful others, including their peers, recognize them as a strong science student are correlated with their persistence in science courses and careers. Yet, prior work has found a gender bias in peer recognition, in which student nominations of strong peers disproportionately favor men over women, in some instructional science contexts. Researchers have hypothesized that such a gender bias diminishes over time, as determined by students’ academic year: studies have found a gender bias in peer recognition in science courses aimed at first-year students, but not in science courses aimed at beyond first-year students. This hypothesis that patterns of peer recognition change over time, however, has yet to be tested with longitudinal data—previous studies only examine snapshots of different students in different science courses. In this study, we isolate the effect of time on peer recognition by analyzing student nominations of strong peers across a two-semester introductory physics course sequence, containing the same set of students and the same instructor in both semesters, at a mostly women institution. Using a combination of social network analysis and qualitative methods, we find that while many students receive similar levels of peer recognition over time, the four most highly nominated students—the recognition celebrities—exhibit some change between semesters even in this highly controlled setting. Furthermore, we observe that these changes in the celebrities track closely with changes in student outspokenness and that being outspoken is likely more important for gaining recognition than earning a high grade in the class. These findings lend support to prior work’s hypothesis that peer recognition changes over time, but also challenge the generalizability of previous results (i.e., that patterns of recognition are related to students’ academic year). Instead, peer recognition seems highly sensitive to variables such as individual students’ participation and, therefore, may be course specific. We provide recommendations for both when and how instructors may intervene on peer recognition based on our results.","PeriodicalId":54296,"journal":{"name":"Physical Review Physics Education Research","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2024-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140839635","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：